Speeches

Air passenger rights must not be reduced. Today, this type of transport is much more accessible and more and more people are using it to travel for work or entertainment. The COVID pandemic and the ensuing economic upheavals and lockdowns have caused many people in transport to lose their jobs. It is therefore difficult today to find workers who have in the meantime retrained for other positions. This causes poor performance of airports and airlines, frequent delays and cancellations. However, this does not mean that passengers have to carry it, which is why it is proposed to limit compensation for cancelled or delayed flights. It is important that we maintain compensation from 3 hours of flight delay. I also support the proposals for a mandatory minimum baggage allowance for each passenger. The proposal for a handbag, as well as for smaller luggage not exceeding 100cm of counted dimensions free of charge on board each flight, is a minimum standard that will encourage increased interest in air travel and lighten passenger wallets. We are all passengers, and it is this standard for transport that is an example for the rest of the world of how to promote citizens' rights.

Mr President, the citizens of the European Union do not expect ideological lessons from us. They expect order, security and control. Anyone who does not have the right to remain in the European Union must simply return. Return decisions cannot be voluntary recommendations and when the European Union cannot secure returns, it loses credibility. At the same time, I reject hypocrisy. Europe needs a workforce, but one that is legal, regulated and under the control of the Member States. Not chaos, not smugglers and dictates from Brussels. Migration will not be solved on paper, but only by determination. Less phrases and more performance, less activism and more accountability to our own citizens. The reintroduction of control does not mean closing borders, but better managing them. We have the right to choose who we let into the territory of the European Union and who can stay here. We clearly need to have truthful information about migrants who often abuse the system and pretend to be asylum seekers, for clear economic reasons. If we want citizens' trust, we need to show them that the European Union can act. Strong, fair and solidarity-based.

Madam President, this decision is terribly bad and terribly stupid for the European Union, and I think that we too should be more concerned with what our own citizens, our citizens, not the citizens or the people of Ukraine alone, want. Separating ourselves from Russian gas, which is close to us, which goes through the oven, which is more ecological than carrying tankers from the United States of America and the like, is absolutely wrong. We just can't break away from something we have near our territory. Apart from the fact that we are discussing this now, how great it is for all of us. And I know that Commissioner, you said when you presented this in committee that simply not even a molecule of Russian gas should come to the territory of the European Union. I know this is your policy. I don't think that's right. There are territories of the European Union, for example the Slovak Republic, which is heavily gasified, so we are simply going to need gas. The fact that we want to cut ourselves off from Russian gas also means that we do not believe that the war in Ukraine will end and that we will somehow cooperate with the Russian Federation. We have different dependencies, different countries, and I understand that some countries support this because they will receive transit fees from the rest of us on a much larger scale for their national budget. But it's just bad and stupid, and we're just not going to help the competitiveness of the European Union or our own companies in this way, because they need cheaper, better gas coming from Russia in this case. So let's not cut ourselves off, let's not do this, let's not shoot ourselves in the next leg, and let's not make stupid decisions that we'll have to repair anyway, as in the case of internal combustion engines. In five years, I promise you this will happen.

Madam President, as we sit here, most of us are already addicted to the internet, to mobile technology. As I look at you, most of you hold a mobile phone in your hands and try to be available to answer something. And while we, as adults, see what the harmful content on the Internet is, there is a much bigger problem with children. The digital world is growing faster than our rules can. And our children, if we can protect them by telling them not to talk to a stranger on the street, it's much harder to protect them online. I think there is too much dangerous content online, manipulative content and unmanageable for our children's younger age. We need to do three things. Firstly, strictly enforce the existing rules in the European Union. In my view, platforms must be held accountable not only for what they lubricate, but also for what they allow their algorithms to spread on their networks. Secondly, we need systematic support for digital literacy to educate children, parents and schools to have the tools to recognise which content can be harmful. And thirdly, we need to clearly reject the commercial use of children's data, because children must not be the product or the target of marketing experiments and targeted advertising on the Internet.

Thank you very much for the wonderful question, which was not really a question. It was the political position of Progressive Slovakia. As you can see, this has been normal for several months now. Progressive Slovakia tells us that we are all perfect here in the European Parliament, only we in Slovakia are the only bad ones. Robert Fico is the only bad guy. And we've forgotten. Viktor Orbán. Andrei Babis will be there soon, and I believe that another Polish representative will be there, because then it will be complete and they will be the only ones we will all criticize here. My colleague, if you were really looking at what is happening in Slovakia, what the Slovak government is really doing, you would know that we are diversifying. We're not afraid of being cut off. We think that this is a bad decision for the European Union, which is wrong, and these fools of yours, that it is like the European Parliament, we know that there is a majority here, and yet we will stand here and protest, because that decision is wrong.

Mr President, it is clear to me that you will not all applaud me, but it does not matter at all. You couldn't do it through sanctions, so you devised legislation at European level to ban imports of Russian gas, oil. And now our amazing colleagues from Progressive Slovakia have added nuclear fuel there. And this Parliament has gone so crazy that it still wants to push forward the agreement that has been reached in the Council, that if something like this is going to happen, it is going to happen in 2027, that we are going to do it in two months in 2026. Well, dear colleagues, I do not know whether you are aware that if you are so defamatory or want to prevent countries like Slovakia or Hungary from importing these raw materials, it is these countries that are exporting those products from these raw materials to your beloved Ukraine. It is oil, gas and electricity that our countries export to Ukraine, so that your beloved Ukrainian people can continue to fight for your nonsense. You want to replace your dependence on this amazing product - oil, gas and nuclear fuel - from Russia with the United States, because it is our perfect partner. You are jeopardising not only the national security and energy security of the eastern part of the European Union, but of the entire European Union as a whole. This is not something you should be proud of, dear friends. You don't realize that with such decisions you are actually saying that you never believe that the war will end and that we will be able to coexist in some way with Russia. Open your eyes and make the right decisions.

Madam President, colleagues, we finally have peace in this territory. And even if the European Union has not been able to bring about this peace, we should be able to try, as the European Union, to be one of the guarantors that there will be peace on the territory of Israel and Palestine. I am proud that the Slovak Republic recognised Palestine as a state already in 1993 and that we also did not hesitate to send humanitarian aid there during the fighting that has been going on there for the last two years. Two states are the only solution to this conflict, and now it is up to the European Union to try to make this happen. Of course, our task is also to support the Palestinians, to really ensure that humanitarian aid is in place, to put an end to the famine in this territory and not to create a new Afghanistan. And we can only do this by being on the ground, by supporting those people behind that peace initiative. While it's Donald Trump that we may not all like, on the other hand, he's the only person, and the United States was the only country that was able to eventually bring these two sides to the table and really make the deal that we believe will be permanent. The time has come for respect and human dignity for all, and also for us not to forget that those people who have died, not only those civilians, but also those journalists and those humanitarian workers, deserve justice.

Mr President, if we say that industry is the backbone of the European Union, agriculture is certainly the heart and the vascular system that really feeds everyone. That is why it is important that, also in the coming period and in this European Parliament in general, we agree that we need this system to work. I think that a number of the proposals that have come from the European Commission are good, but we cannot simplify or simplify the whole of the Union's agriculture and agricultural policy by reducing its funding and simplifying it by putting all these funds together and pretending that it is simplification. And that's all good. That is the first thing I want to say, for sure, that agriculture, agricultural policy, deserves its own programme and its own finances separately from the others. What we need is definitely less control and less bureaucracy for farmers. And I am very pleased that even in these proposals, which the Members have prepared and which are very good and I will be happy to support, there are also less controls for farmers and as a result of the farmers' protests that have been there. We call for simplification of environmental requirements for small farmers, for medium-sized farmers and for less environmental and other administrative burdens. We certainly need to support farmers and farmers who bring added value, and I am very pleased that the Commission is going to support them in this way.

Ms Strik, thank you very much for your words. I don't know how many times you have visited Slovakia or how much do you know about Slovakia, but I don't want to be disrespectful about this. But I would like to ask, you very much mentioned several times the rule of law. So can you please quote or tell me where the rule of law definition is in the European law? If you are so much sure about that, thank you very much.

Madam President, colleagues, first of all, competitiveness is not arms. This year, we are also talking about the Draghi report, which talks about competitiveness and how to really make the European economy prosper, people should have done better. Instead, we are proposing more armaments here in the new budget, withdrawing money from agriculture, from regional policy, from social policy and from all the good policies that speak of people. It is even suggested here that, therefore, people should be liable for our, perhaps even some of the bad decisions that the European Union can potentially make in the future. And that they will guarantee with their deposits if something really happens. I think we should really think about what competitiveness is. How can we, as the European Union, be competitive with China and America, which we are talking about here, that they are so bad because they have done this and this. But in fact, it is our bad decisions in the European Union that are not really helping us and are causing us problems. Bad decisions such as Green DealWhich, for example, we wanted to cut slightly, we wanted to change. Draghi also said that let's talk about some simplification, but all that is being proposed so far still brings only more and more problems and does not help the European economy at all. Cancel the whole Green DealLet us invest in people, in social policy, in regions and in agriculture, and then we will be truly competitive.

Madam President, agriculture is indeed a very innovative space today. We have new technologies, we have satellite navigation and we have different things that are used in agriculture. I am very glad that many young people still want to do agriculture. My brother recently got a tractor license because he sees this as an opportunity. But in order to preserve those young people and those people in agriculture, we certainly need to maintain financial support for agricultural policy also in the European Union. I am very pleased, Commissioner, that you have said that agricultural policy will have an important and crucial role for the European Union also in the next budget. But it is also important, as a number of colleagues before me have said, that we also maintain financial support. Not only did they talk about some, maybe some new priorities, but they also talked about the fact that money was still going to agriculture. There is certainly a need to talk about top-ups and maintaining direct payments in this context, because after twenty years of membership of the European Union, countries such as my own – the Slovak Republic – are still 85% compared to Western European countries, for example as regards direct payments. In the international agreements we conclude with other countries, we must also take care to promote agriculture. I am very curious about the outcome of the new treaty with Ukraine, which in my opinion is quite unfavourable. And indeed, the quotas we offer Ukraine are much higher than would be appropriate.

Thank you, Mr President. Colleagues, this attack on Iran by Israel and all that Israel is currently doing in the region must be unequivocally condemned. And I am really sick of colleagues who even say that we should thank and be grateful for such an attack. How can anyone approve a nuclear attack? We're really so stupid, and we can't imagine what it could mean if this nuclear device really exploded? How can we approve attacks on civilians in Iran? How can we say that those scientists who were killed there, who were part of the nuclear program, is it right that we were killed by Israel? How can we say that now those hostile scientists can be killed, because that's the right thing to do. I would be very interested in where Israel wants to stop and how much we are willing to tolerate it. For a year and a half, we cannot condemn the genocide in Gaza, where thousands of civilians have died, thousands of people have already died, and tens of thousands more are waiting for help and dying of hunger. I would be very interested to know why the European Commission cannot give a clear position and cannot say unequivocally that we condemn it. And I am also interested in what sanctions, and specifically what sanctions, you intend to propose at the prime ministers' meeting and at the foreign ministers' meeting against Israel, because this cannot simply be tolerated.

Mr President, colleagues, the accession of any country to the European Union must be fair and must be based on the same criteria. That is why I reject any discussion that we should create some new memberships for some specific countries specifically in the east of the European Union. With regard to Montenegro, Montenegro, I must say that I thank the Commissioner very much for her report. It is indeed the country that is most prepared to join the European Union. It is certainly worth appreciating the progress they have made, particularly as regards the technical chapters, and I hope that they will continue. And I think that the European Union should perhaps also consider greater funding and support for experts, so that Montenegro can really become a Member State of the European Union as soon as possible. The same approach is certainly crucial. Montenegro also deserves this place to say that they have a clear prospect of membership of the European Union, and I believe that this will still be the case in this period and that we, as Members of the European Parliament, may also be able to vote on Montenegro's accession to the European Union. Because I think that the European Union really should be extended to the countries of the Western Balkans or the Balkans as such, because they are the best prepared. And the closure of these chapters in Montenegro is certainly important for the progress of the whole region.

One year ago, Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico was assassinated in Slovakia on 15 May 2024. Just because he had a different opinion. In a democratic country, in a Member State of the European Union, someone intervened in politics because of political convictions. There are people who say he deserved it, that he did it himself, that it didn't happen, that it was staged, and so on. But Robert Fico will live his entire life with the consequences of these few wounds and shots into his body. Politicians all over the world are victims of attacks. An example of this is Donald Trump, and some people like to take it easy. It is not only a problem for Slovakia, it is a memento for all of us, where hatred, disrespect, media lynching and political fanaticism can lead. We all, here in the European Parliament too, are responsible for the tone we speak. Words can kill. Unfortunately, the atmosphere of hatred that some of you have legitimised for years now also has its victims. If we want to preserve democracy, we must stop calling people with different views enemies, because politics is not meant to be war.

Colleagues, I have listened so much to the whole debate, and that was such a terrible ideological ideology of hatred, and I think many of you should realize that you represent the citizens of the European Union, not the citizens of Ukraine. And that our main objective should be to make the citizens of the European Union better off, including, for example, responsible energy prices. Commissioner, I do not agree with your proposal. I think that the Commission is absolutely exceeding its powers, going beyond what was agreed in Versailles, because in Versailles, for example, nothing was said about nuclear energy. And all of your proposal to ban the import of fuel and nuclear supplements from the Russian Federation directly threatens the energy security of several European Union states, including my own – the Slovak Republic. We do not agree with this proposal at all. Colleagues, please be aware that this proposal speaks of, for example, that the European Commission absolutely does not believe that any peaceful solution to this conflict is possible. He does not believe in any normal arrangement of relations with the Russian Federation, which should also matter to us. And so I would like to hear from the European Commission sometime. We are replacing independence or dependence on Russia with dependence on the United States of America for something that is absolutely disadvantageous. Finally, only the citizens of the European Union will pay for it. Let's all get together.

Madam President, this year we are celebrating the 80th anniversary of the end of the Second World War, and it is this year that the European Union, which was created as a project to prevent peace, to protect peace, is debating how to give money for more weapons, and we are saying that this will be our new reality. The European Union was created as a project, originally as a coal and steel project, we have already banned coal in the European Union and we see the problems with the steel industry in the European Union. We have problems with energy, we have problems with energy and its prices for citizens, so I would also like to call here for - indeed - compliance with the Council conclusions, which were at the beginning of March, to ask and help the Slovak Republic and other countries in the east of the European Union to finally allow Ukraine to transit Russian gas through their territory, to have gas diversification and to have really cheaper energy resources for the Eastern European Union. There will be new car tariffs tomorrow. Slovakia is the country that produces the most cars per capita worldwide, which is why we will also be very touched by these measures and we are preparing various proposals, precisely in cooperation with the automotive industry, on how the European Union should intervene, because we need to do this in order to protect our citizens.

Madam President, I am listening, so here we are listening to the various things that are being said here, but I think the most important thing is to rebuild trust in both the institutions and the EU, not by other bodies, but by thoroughly investigating what has happened and that the individuals who are responsible will see justice. This also means in Pfizergate and in the text messages of the President of the European Commission. We don't need any more organs. We need what works, and we need to treat it all as individual failures. I do not want us, as a European institution, to say that this is all wrong now, and that is why we need to dig through everything, because it is indeed an individual failure. And we are neither prosecutors, nor judges, nor executioners, to talk about what is going to happen, and let us leave it all to the authorities to investigate. Let us not chase witches, let us follow the rules, let us not slander each other, but let us do our job and control the European Commission in particular. I think that it is not the new European ethics bodies that should be in this House, but we should, for example, monitor more closely what is happening in the European Commission, which people are responsible for what they are responsible for, and also, above all, how NGOs operate in the European Union, which receive money from European sources and are unwilling to report on their activities. This is where we should start, not just green NGOs, but such Transparency International, for example.

Mr President, colleagues, affordable energy is a right, not a privilege for people, and we should strive to make energy prices generally available to citizens, not only to businesses, but also to citizens. Several colleagues have spoken here about how we can compare prices in the United States and the European Union, how many times higher are prices in the European Union compared to the United States, which reduces our competitiveness and increases the price of our products. This is one of the things we should look at more. I also think that cutting off cheap resources and fossil fuels is the wrong step that the European Union is taking, and we should rethink it. I also think that when we talk about heating and heating, banning fossil fuel boilers was a bad solution. And if we just electrify everything, we don't have enough electricity right now and we have to build more grids. And I appreciate that the Commission also wants to do so. I would also like to say, Commissioner Jørgensen, that I very much appreciate your contribution to the debate that the Slovak Republic has with Ukraine, where we are trying to restore the transit of gas through Ukrainian territory for the Slovak Republic, so that we have better energy security both for the Slovaks and for the whole of Eastern and Central Europe.

Mr President, Commissioner, I am very interested in how the European Commission will deal with the extension of the agreement with Ukraine to import Ukrainian products into our territory, because we know that we in Eastern Europe have had a big problem with this, and the time is coming and it is very quiet. So I would be very happy if you could possibly answer. Both Slovak farmers and farmers in the European Union deserve, of course, respect and reverence. And we saw that we had a lot of protests here, and a lot of those demands were, of course, very relevant. In agriculture, we should try to cut red tape, cut controls for farmers, and I am glad that, thanks to their pressure, we have succeeded in part, for the smaller ones in recent times. We can talk about food. I've noticed that in your show you're also dealing with food. It is the second largest sector in the European economy and I think that we should also focus on how to protect food producers who produce a very large number of very important and healthy food in the European Union, but also in relation to exports to countries such as the United States, where we are currently also threatened with some duties or taxes on such imports. Of course, diversification of agriculture is also important in the context of climate change, and we should also support it, but above all preserve the money in agriculture for the next period.

Madam President, colleagues, today the European Union is faced with the fundamental question of whether we will continue unrealistic green experiments or finally start listening to industry, trade unions and citizens. In Slovakia, we want a sensible, not ideological, transformation of the automotive industry. I welcome that there is at least some common sense and the Commission has put forward an option for carmakers to meet CO standards2 in three years' time and will not start collecting fines today, as originally proposed, because it would be truly liquidating. We know that the term of banning incinerators until 2035 is meaningless and harmful. We need to rethink the whole decision and, at the same time, give room for the development of synthetic fuels, hybrids and hydrogen, not just electric vehicles, which are extremely expensive. European carmakers do not need bureaucratic restrictions. They need fair conditions. If the European Union cannot protect its own production, only foreign cars will be sold in a few years, our factories will close their doors and we will lose millions of jobs. At the same time, electric cars need fewer workers to produce. If we want to support the transition, we need to give clear funding for retraining and not just talk about social responsibility.

Madam President, there is no ideal agreement. The deal is a compromise and the art of the possible, and I think that's how you talk about farmers. I don't know where you were when we talked about Slovak and Eastern European farmers and the flooding of products from Ukraine of agricultural origin. But I think that in this case we should be pragmatic. We will help farmers by reducing burdens and pointless bureaucracy, encouraging the consumption of domestic products and food, increasing salaries, maintaining jobs. Preserving jobs is precisely the promotion of industry and competitiveness offered by Mercosur. And I see it as an opportunity for the European economy, because we are export oriented. The opportunity to open up other markets and, just as Commissioner Šefčovič said, reducing the burden in terms of duties and taxes or tariffs on our cars, for example, which are very important for Slovakia, is certainly an opportunity and, I think, a positive aspect of Mercosur. It has been negotiated for more than 20 years. There has been a lot of talk about it, they have tried to be really pragmatic and to see what an opportunity there is in all that we can achieve with this agreement. I would also like to draw attention to what the Commissioner said: we are talking here about some food quality and that we do not want to import and we want our phytosanitary standards. The Commission has made it clear to us that our phytosanitary standards will be respected and that this is part of this agreement. So let us not lie here to our constituents and to the citizens of the European Union.

First of all, I want to appreciate the civilisation of this debate, and I would like to say that death in the workplace of any person, or in the performance of his work or because of his work, is, of course, a great disaster. But when it comes to murder, it's even sadder. However, I would also like to stop dancing on the graves of these two people and using them for political discussion. And if we return, of course, to some normal debate. Today we are also talking about civil liberties or media freedom, the rule of law and the protection of journalists, but all journalists within the European Union. I am very sorry for dozens of people who, for example, died in various conflicts, as well as those who died in the wars in Israel and Gaza and in countless other conflicts around the world. I believe that in the EU, and also at large, we have sufficient media freedom and sufficient freedom for journalists to work. But we must realize that with freedom comes responsibility, and responsibility is also about how journalists pass on some facts. Unfortunately, some debate in Slovakia resulted in this, so completely hateful, which was also created thanks to the media, that, for example, an assassination of the Prime Minister of the Slovak Republic was committed. This is also the responsibility of journalists to be aware of what they are supposed to report. And that, in fact, pluralism, to which the Commissioner also referred, is also a very important part of the job, so that we respect other opinions and respect each other as politicians and journalists.

on behalf of the PPE-DE Group. - (DE) Mr President, colleagues, this, in turn, is such a meaningless debate that has something in its title that is not even true. And interestingly, we're talking about something here, pretending it exists, and there's no facts. Some two media houses or some two media outlets are saying something here, and there's no investigation, there's nothing on the table, and we're pretending here in the European Parliament that this is true? Colleagues, let's be careful what we say. If that were true, what does it say about our own security as a European Union, about the security of our own systems? If such a thing were really possible. We are accusing the Member State here. I would like to say, then, Mr Wawrykiewicz, the colleague who opened this debate. Orbán, as prime minister of a member state of the European Union, is an enemy of the Western world and the European Union. That's like something I don't know if any of us can afford to do that at all, and let's realize what we're talking about here. There are no facts, no evidence. What would Orban do if he was really spying on the people you're talking about, what would he know, right? OLAF's reports and all that information are completely public and they're all published, so I don't know what anyone would get out of this. So we're not investigators, we're not representatives of the secret services, and talking about such things as facts here is absolutely wrong, and I think it's completely nonsense, and we're wasting our time here in this House.

Mr President, agriculture and agricultural work are certainly difficult and unpredictable. We have weather influences, we have animals, we have natural disasters. We can have bad seeds or diseases of animals or crops, and this certainly affects the work of the farmer and his result. It's hard physical work, and with all this comes, of course, various challenges. Also on the mental health of farmers, who are constantly worried about whether they will be able to maintain their business or their farm in some way and whether they will be able to continue to work with their family. What can we do to change the situation? I know that for the Commissioner this is also a personal matter and a personal desire for us to change the situation. Additional certainty and financial support for farmers in the east of the European Union. This is certainly the case, for example, by making up for direct payments to eastern European farmers. At last, after 20 years of being in the European Union. It is also certainly financial support that will be sufficient and timely. Innovative technologies that we will use in agriculture need to be supported. When we import products from other countries, and I do not only mean Mercosur, but I also mean countries like Ukraine, we have to think about how these products can affect the situation, for example, people in the east of the European Union, such as Slovakia, Poland and other countries that have had a problem precisely because of the import of these cheap products. Thus, international treaties and their convention are also very important when we want to address these investments for farmers and we want to reduce their controls and we want to reduce the bureaucracy for farmers, so that they do not have a burden, even if they have to constantly prove, report and hand over papers, because this is an additional psychological burden for them.